@jdundas wrote:Considering my very limited budget what would you think about me picking up a helios 135mm 2.8 for around $120-150? I also picked up a 50mm 1.8 yesterday which I am enjoying. Right now I can't drop $700 or more on a lense. If I were to buy a 70D it was going to be in the future..
What purpose is this "helios 135mm 2.8" going to serve? How good is that lens? Your 55-250 covers that focal length already.
The EF 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II lens that I have is a pretty good lens for the price. It gets great bokeh. Here is a shot with your same lens, that just happens to have been set to 135mm.
Rebel T5, EF 55-250 f/4-5.6 IS II, 135mm, 1/250, f/5.6, ISO-200, "P" mode. This is a "practice" shot, for bokeh [and DOF].
You have just picked up a new(?) 50mm lens. I hope you have the EF 50mm f/1.8 STM, the one that has a metal connection to the camera, instead of the cheap black plastic. Learn to use that lens' wide aperture effectively, save your money.
Practice controlling the bokeh [depth of field], to produce shots like the one above. Both foregraound and background wild flowers are equally out of focus, with only the flowers at a mid-range distance in focus. I had to move to just the right distance, and focal length, to get that shot.
Remember, the more money you save now, the sooner that you can get that camera upgrade at some future date.
@RobertTheFat wrote:
@ebiggs1 wrote:Bob from Boston,
"... an excellent eye for composition ..."
An attribute mostly lost on this forum. Gear can only take you so far but good gear can take you farther.
I'm not much for sloganeering, but there's one observation I think holds up pretty well: Better equipment will make any photographer better, but how much better depends on how good you already are. The better you are, the more difference better equipment makes.
"However, there is no substitute for good technique, either. Bad technique trumps a quality lens, every day of the week."
@Waddizzle wrote:
@RobertTheFat wrote:
@ebiggs1 wrote:Bob from Boston,
"... an excellent eye for composition ..."
An attribute mostly lost on this forum. Gear can only take you so far but good gear can take you farther.
I'm not much for sloganeering, but there's one observation I think holds up pretty well: Better equipment will make any photographer better, but how much better depends on how good you already are. The better you are, the more difference better equipment makes.
"However, there is no substitute for good technique, either. Bad technique trumps a quality lens, every day of the week."
Well, I guess that was my point. If you have bad technique, better equipment won't help you much. But if your technique is good, you can take fuller advantage of better equipment.
"... a matter of personal taste, than anything else?"
Yes sir, it is. And that, my friend, is the point to all photography. You just might make it yet! 
If you like it that is all that is important no matter what 'terms' are applied.
But, my deffinition of bokeh has more to do with specific "points' or highlights in an OOF background. The Christmas tree light example is one that is always passed around. Bokeh is mostly or largely controlled by the shape and number of aperture blades.
"Yes sir, it is. And that, my friend, is the point to all photography. You just might make it yet! If you like it that is all that is important no matter what 'terms' are applied. "
It was merely a test shot, a self-imposed homework assignment, if you will. I achieved everything that I wanted with the shot, as seen in the lower left and right corners. I was figuring out how to get nearby and more distant flowers equally OOF, while the mid-range wild flowers could be in focus. For that lens, it is a pretty good shot.
As far as bokeh goes, the more distant background greenery is my idea of bokeh, not the OOF flowers.
[EDIT] "Practice controlling the bokeh, to produce shots like the one above."
I suppose that I mispoke there. I should have said practice controlling the depth of field.
